Book Review: Uncle Silas by Sheridan Le Fanu

Uncle Silas

By: Sheridan Le Fanu

Original Pub. Date: 1864

Pub. Date: June 2001

Publisher: Penguin Group (USA)

Format: Paperback , 528pp   Series: Penguin Classics Series

ISBN-13: 9780140437461

ISBN: 0140437460

Source: Personal Copy

Synopsis:

From the moment that Madame de la Rougierre is hired as governess to the young, naive Maud Ruthyn, a dark cloud of foreboding hangs over the entire household. A liar, a bully and a spy, Madame eventually leaves, taking her dark secret with her. But, unhappily for Maud, that is not the last of Madame de la Rougierre. For when Maud is orphaned she is sent to live with her mysterious Uncle Silas, a man with a scandalous- even murderous- past, and encounters Madame once more. This time her sinister role in Maud's destiny will become all to clear. With its world of spirits, locked cabinets, kidnapping and past secrets that spill into the present, Le Fanu's shocking novel of sensation is a chilling and groundbreaking psychological thriller.

My Review:

I'm torn how to rate Uncle Silas. I give it an A for atmosphere and writing but a B-/C+ for plot. Right from the beginning of Uncle Silas, the reader knows that the are reading a classic Gothic novel. The young protagonist, Maud, is naive and isolated from the world. She lives relatively alone, with only her distant father and a few servants. In order to remedy Maud's education, her father hires a governess, who turns out to be cruel and mad.

Shortly after convincing her father to fire Madame de la Rougierre, the governess, Maud's father dies. Maud then has to follow her father's last instructions, which include communicating with a seemingly-creepy man, and then following the instructions in his will. Maud's father instructs that Maud is to be under the care of his brother, Silas. Silas is a reclusive man with a rumored past... rumors which include murder.

It's during this time when the plot seems to falter. The middle of the book had very little action, and what did happen didn't really seem to build up to the conclusion at all. It may have let the suspense build up since the reader knows something bad will happen but doesn't know what or who will be the cause of it. Uncle Silas is full of seedy characters- some who turn out good and others not so good.

The conclusion is excellent. Most of the loose threads are tied up and the reader can finally breathe easily.

I recommend this book for those who like classic books with mystery and gothic aspects but also the patience to read through some tedious passages.

P.S. Isn't the picture on the cover creepy??! I did not like it sitting on my bedside table when I went to bed... it's too scary.

My Rating: 3.5-4 out of 5 stars

Book Review: Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh

Brideshead Revisited

By: Evelyn Waugh

Pub. Date: January 1982

Publisher: Little, Brown & Company

Format: Paperback , 368pp  

ISBN-13: 9780316926348

ISBN: 0316926345

Source: Personal Copy

 

Synopsis:

The most nostalgic and reflective of Evelyn Waugh's novels, "Brideshead Revisited" looks back to the golden age before the Second World War. It tells the story of Charles Ryder's infatuation with the Marchmains and the rapidly-disappearing world of privilege they inhabit. Enchanted first by Sebastian at Oxford, then by his doomed Catholic family, in particular his remote sister, Julia, Charles comes finally to recognize only his spiritual and social distance from them.

My Review:

I have very mixed feelings about Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited. On one hand, the writing, especially in the beginning, is too dense and flowery which makes it hard to get into and the characters have few redeeming qualities. However, the writing is also beautiful at moments and the characters grow on me so that I begin to care about what happens to them.

Brideshead Revisited is about Charles Ryder's reflections on his youth (college years). His memoir starts because his military unit is stationed at the former house of his college friend, Sebastian Marchmain. In his first year at Oxford, Charles meets Sebastian, an unusual fellow who carries around a teddy bear called Aloysius. Sebastian's family represents the rich and luxurious life of the slowly decaying privileged class in England.

Sebastian does not like his family or feeling like anyone is trying to control him, so as Charles becomes more familiar with his family, Sebastian turns to alcohol to give him relief. Charles and Sebastian's relation at Oxford starts at an extreme high. Although it's never directly stated, their relationship has a very homosexual feeling to it. While reading about it, I felt really uncomfortable because I didn't know if it they were actually gay or if I was just reading too much into. I really wish that Waugh had been a little more direct about what they were to each other. I think there's strong evidence for Charles being homosexual since he had an affair with Julie, Sebastian's sister, and his main attraction to her seems to be that she bears a strong physical resemblance to Sebastian.

Another big theme in Brideshead Revisited was the role of religion, particularly Catholicism. The Marchmain family is steeped in Catholicism, which may be what led to Sebastians alcoholism. He may have had strong feelings of guilt if he did have homosexual tendencies. Their religion affects all the members of the Marchmain family at some point during the book, even though many confess to being agnostic or atheist earlier.

There were some beautifully written parts of the book and I grew to care about some of the characters. However, I thought a lot of them seemed shallow and I wanted to know more about them and what they were thinking, rather than just seeing their actions, so that I could relate to them and like them more. This is the first book by Waugh that I have read, I'm not sure if I will read more or not.

 

My Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

Readalong: Vanity Fair by William Thackeray Post 2

I am participating in the readalong of Vanity Fair by William Thackeray, hosted by Allie at A Literary Odyssey. This is the second post of two for Vanity Fair.

Vanity Fair was an interesting read. I loved the first half, which I posted about here. But I began to get bored through parts of the second half. There were a lot of lists and descriptions of the aristocracy, which I just don't care about as much as the main characters stories.

However, when the story focused on the main characters, I loved the book! I wanted to know more about Becky Sharp and Amelia's lives. I was very interested in Becky's characters. I found her scheming amusing, although I would not want her for a friend in real life. I thought Becky did have at least some personal insight to her own character when she said:

'I think I could be a good woman if I had five thousand a year. I could dawdle about in the nursery, and count the apricots on the wall' ... And who knows but Rebecca was right in her speculations-and that it was only a question of money and fortune which made the difference between her and an honest woman? If you take temptations in account, who is to say that he is better than his neighbour? A comfortable career of prosperity, if it does not make people honest, at least keeps them so. (page 414)

There are many quotes in Vanity Fair that I like, especially the ones about Becky. This is one of my favorites:

He [Lord Steyne] saw at a glance what had happened in his absence: and was grateful to his wife for once. He went and spoke to her, and called her by her Christian name, so as again to bring blushes to her pale face-'My wife say have been singing like an angel,' he said to Becky. Now there are angels of two kinds, and both sorts, it is said, are charming in their way. (page 482)

I love that Thackeray just can't resist throwing in another jibe at Becky's character! She may sing like an angel, but there are two sorts of angels, so guess which one she is!

Finally, one of my other favorite characters is William Dobbin. At first I didn't like him much because he was always sacrificing himself for others instead of trying to make himself happy, but at the end of the book, that changed and I believe that he became of the hero in the 'Novel without a Hero.' Finally, on page 662, Dobbin leaves Amelia! I love it! He finally takes control of his life and decides to leaves Amelia since she isn't able to love him back:

I know what your heart is capable of: it can cling faithfully to a recollection, and cherish a fancy; but it can't feel such an attachment as mine deserves to mate with, and such as I would have won from a woman more generous than you. No, you are not worthy of the love which I have devoted to you. I knew all along that the prize I had set my life on was not worth the winning; that I was a fool, with fond fancies, too, bartering away my all of truth and ardour against your little feeble remanany of love. I will bargain no more: I withdraw. I find no fault with you. Youa re very good-natured, and have done your best; but you couldn't-you couldn't reach up to the height of the attachment which I bore you, and which a loftier soul than yours might have been proud to share. Good-bye, Amelia! I have watched your struggle. Let it end. We are both weary of it.

I know I've included quite a few quotes, but I love how they are written. These words show the personalities of the characters. While Vanity Fair  is not an easy book to get through, I do think that it is worth it. The characters are interesting and well-described and the ending for them is justified. Some of the passages are incredibly humorous, mostly sarcastic or sardonic and witty.



Readalong: The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky Post 4

I am participating in the readalong for The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky, hosted by A Literary Odyssey. This is the fourth post of 4 total posts, it covers Part 4 in The Idiot. My previous posts can be found here: First Post Second Post Third Post

I stayed up late last night to finish The Idiot. The end of The Idiot certainly reaches a climax where all of the characters seem to run around like chickens with their heads cut off. They accuse each other of being scandalous or attention-seeking and refuse to listen to each other, preferring to live with their own views of the events around them.

Prince Myshkin is caught between two women, Nastasya Filippovna and Aglaia Epanchin. They both want him and make claims on him, which he tries to please. The Prince is far too good-hearted and/or simple to realize that he needs to make his own decision for his life and stick with it. Instead, at the critical moment in this love triangle, he falls short and stays to take care of Nastasya instead of rushing after Aglaia, whom he actually cares for. This split-moment decision really decides the fate for these three unhappy characters, as well as the surrounding characters.

Dostoevsky gives an unhappy ending to each of these characters, which I'll leave for you to read yourself, but I'm not really sure what the point is that he's trying to make with their fates. Is it their modern society/focus on money that leads them to destruction? Is it the prince's goodness that destroys them- perhaps connecting their fates to that of Jesus' in Holbein's painting that Dostoevsky mentions several times. And what is the point of Rogozhin's character and actions? He plays the pivotal action in Nastaya's fate but I'm still a little unclear as to why this was necessary? I just don't understand Rogozhin at all- is he (and everyone else) just crazy?!

I liked this story by Dostoevsky for the analysis of the characters and the story, which is actually pretty simply, that it told. The characters are definitely Dostoevsky's strong point. As I pointed out in post 3, I believe that Dostoevsky is amazing at portraying madness and despair. However, there were a few things that I did not like; for example, characters often went off in tangents during their conversations that, I assume, were Dostoevsky's own thoughts but that did not often lend anything to the story. I enjoyed some of these views in the beginning of the story that were about execution and exile of prisoners because I knew that it directly related to Dostoevsky's own life, but later on the views got to be tedious and I didn't know why I was reading them.